On Fri, 9 Mar 2018 08:43:33 +1100
Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:09:24 +0100
> Torsten Duwe <d...@lst.de> wrote:
> > +save_stack_trace_tsk_reliable(struct task_struct *tsk,
> > + struct stack_trace *trace)
>
> Just double checking this is called under the task_rq_lock, so its
> safe to call task_stack_page() as opposed to try_get_task_stack()
Yes. IIRC a comment at the call site mentioned it.
[...]
> > + if (sp < stack_page + sizeof(struct thread_struct)
> > + || sp > stack_page + THREAD_SIZE -
> > STACK_FRAME_OVERHEAD)
> > + return 1;
>
> Some of this is already present in validate_sp(), it also validates
> irq stacks, should we just reuse that?
This goes a bit along one of Josh's points; I'll answer there, OK?
[...]
> Looks good to me otherwise.
>
> Acked-by: Balbir Singh <bsinghar...@gmail.com>
Thanks.
Torsten
